Delhi District Court
DjIii Cum I/C Asj (West) vs Mr. Vikal Bhadana on 12 January, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SMT. PRATIBHA RANI,
DJIII CUM I/C ASJ (WEST), DELHI
***
Suit No.873/10 Unique Case ID No.02401C0450032010 L&T Finance Limited Having its Registered Office at L & T House, Ballard Estate, P.O Box 278, Mumbai400001.
Regional Office at: 1 DLF Industrial Area Main Najafgarh Road, near Moti Nagar Metro Station, Moti Nagar, New Delhi.
Through Sh.Chandresh Bolia .....Petitioner Versus Mr. Vikal Bhadana, S/o Mr. Samay Singh Bhadana, A1574, Dabua Colony, Distt. Faridabad, Haryana.
Also at :
A1574, Dabua Colony, NIT, Faridabad, Haryana.
....Respondent
(Suit No.873/10) (1 of 5)
Date of Institution : 01.10.2010
Date of Arguments : 12.01.2011
Date of judgment : 12.01.2011
Petition U/s 9 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 EXPARTE JUDGMENT:
1. Petitioner has filed the present petition U/S 9 of the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 claiming that the respondent had approached the petitioner bank seeking grant of loan for purchase of commercial vehicle i.e. TATA 1613 Turbo BSII bearing engine No. 697PC56DTZ117800 and chassis No.373145DTZ114628. On the request of the respondent an amount of Rs.8,60,000/ was sanctioned vide Loancumhypothecation agreement No.OCVF/TLA/30379 dated 10.12.2007. The respondent agreed to repay the loan amount with interest in 35 monthly installments i.e. first installment of Rs.30,424/ and remaining 34 installments of Rs.30,494/ each. Necessary documents in that regard were claimed to have been executed by the respondent. As per case of the petitioner, the petitioner had duly paid the financed amount to the respondent against commercial vehicle i.e. TATA 1613 Turbo BSII bearing engine No.697PC56DTZ117800 and chassis No.373145DTZ114628 and the said vehicle was under exclusive hypothecation of the petitioner. The respondent started defaulting in repayment for which a demandcumtermination notice dated 16.09.2010 was sent to the respondent recalling the loan facility. It was (Suit No.873/10) (2 of 5) further claimed that there existed an arbitration clause in the agreement entered into between the parties and the dispute was to be settled by arbitration. The petitioner had prayed that Shri Chentan Bandua, Authorized Representative of the Petitioner company was appointed as Receiver to take into custody the vehicle in question.
2. Vide order dated 01.10.2010 passed by this Court, Shri Chentan Bandua, Authorized Representative of the petitioner company was appointed as interim receiver to take possession of the vehicle in question.
3. Notice sent to the respondent through ordinary process received back duly served through his father. As none has appeared on behalf of respondent despite service, he was proceeded exparte.
4. I have heard ld. counsel for the petitioner and carefully gone through the record.
5. It was submitted by Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle in question had still not been repossessed but arbitration proceedings had been initiated.
6. Perusal of record reveals that as per Clause 17.1 of the Loan Agreement entered into between the parties, all disputes, differences or (Suit No.873/10) (3 of 5) claims arising out of the agreement shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with provisions of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. As per provisions of Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, a party can approach the court either before or during the arbitration proceedings or at any time after making of the award for interim injunction or appointment of a Receiver. In that view of the matter, this Court is duly empowered to appoint a Receiver in the present matter as there exists an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and order dated 01.10.2010 passed earlier is made absolute. Shri Chentan Bandua, Authorized Representative of the petitioner company is hereby appointed as receiver to take possession the commercial vehicle i.e. TATA 1613 Turbo BSII bearing engine No.697PC56DTZ117800 and chassis No. 373145DTZ114628 in accordance with law from the possession of the respondent. Before taking possession of the vehicle, the receiver shall be duty bound to inform the local police station from within whose jurisdiction the vehicle is to be repossessed and the SHO of the said Police Station would be required to provide police assistance to the Receiver if so required. At the time of taking possession of the vehicle, the receiver shall issue receipt in this regard to the respondent or any other person from whose possession the vehicle is being repossessed and shall mention therein the condition of the vehicle. After repossessing the vehicle in question, the receiver shall get it photographed and keep it (Suit No.873/10) (4 of 5) in the same condition in which it had been repossessed. As arbitration proceedings have already been initiated, the receiver shall be duty bound to maintain the vehicle in same condition till appropriate order in that regard is passed by Ld. Arbitrator. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court
12.01.2011 (PRATIBHA RANI)
DJIIIcumI/c ASJ (West)/Delhi
(Suit No.873/10) (5 of 5)